디지털 증거 중 카카오톡 대화의 압수·수색영장 집행에 대한 참여권

In terms of digital evidence, the right to participate in the process of search & seizure is deemed to be more important than any other kinds of evidence due to the vastitude of digital evidence in small devices. People who have direct interests in the evidence of investigative agencies's crime charges such as suspects would be willing to participate in the Process and the Right to participate starts with notifying the suspects of the attempt of search & seizure. In a case pending at Supreme Court, a prosecutor decided not to notify the suspects because it seemed to be sufficient once he notified the server company. The major reason of not notifying the suspect was based on the exceptional clause quoting urgency. Then what should be the definition of practical reality of urgency that investigative agencies would be able to use in order to get around the demand of notifying suspects of search & seizure? This article tries to analyze a pending Supreme Court case regarding the questions on the Right to Participate search & seizure process of digital evidence. There could not be any ideal answer to that, however the writer attempts to go into innovative answer which might lead the court opinion globally.